New Jersey Moves To Take Control of School District

TRENTON, NJ--Education Commissioner Saul A. Cooperman of New Jersey
last week began proceedings to take control of the Jersey City public
schools, describing the urban district as "bleak'' and rife with
political patronage, cronyism, and fiscal misdealings.

In the first use of the state's new school-intervention law, the
commissioner issued a show-cause order to district officials, giving
them until June 3 to demonstrate why the schools should not be taken
over and operated by the state.

Though several states have similar intervention laws, Jersey City is
the first school district in the nation determined to be in a state of
"academic bankruptcy.'' (See related story on page 12.)

Education officials also filed a separate motion with the New Jersey
office of administrative law for "emergent relief,'' which could place
the district's fiscal and personnel management under state control as
early as mid-June.

In a May 24 press conference here, Mr. Cooperman released a
three-volume, 2,000-page report on the failing Jersey City district.
The massive report, Mr. Cooperman said, documents the results of a
comprehensive compliance investigation that began in June 1987 and cost
$200,000.

The report details what he described as "innumerable deficiencies
that go to the heart of the district's operation.''

"The school district has failed the children and the residents of
the city,'' Mr. Cooperman said. "Our first priority must be to serve as
advocates for these kids to make sure they get the education they
deserve.''

The report also charges that district officials violated state
contract-bidding laws and allowed political interference in school
affairs.

"The Jersey City School District can be characterized as a public
enterprise that has reached a state of managerial bankruptcy,'' the
report says. "The district clearly lacks the resolve or resources that
are essential prerequisites for the fundamental redirection of the
schools.''

Gov. Thomas H. Kean proposed the intervention measure in 1986, and
spent a year battling with the Senate before it was finally passed in
January of this year.

The law gives the education commissioner the power to replace a
district's superintendent, administrative personnel, and school board.
It also authorizes him to raise local taxes and to evaluate principals.
The law permits even tenured administrators to be fired at the end of a
three-stage evaluation process.

Teachers, who had vigorously fought an earlier version of the
intervention measure, are not similarly targeted by the law. But Mr.
Cooperman said last week that all union contracts must be re-negotiated
in the event of state takeover.

The commissioner termed the proposed takeover "invasive surgery,''
and an "intrusion'' that should be undertaken only on rare
occasions.

"This is a type of negative motivation and I really don't like it,''
he added. "But I think it can work.''

He noted that, since 1984, the Jersey City schools had "continually
failed to meet state standards in the monitoring process.''

New Jersey law requires that each district be certified, based on
such standards as student achievement levels, attendance, facilities,
desegregation efforts, and fiscal management.

Ninety-seven percent of the state's 583 districts are currently
certified, according to state officials.

With an enrollment of 29,000, Jersey City is the state's
second-largest district. Most of its students are black or
Hispanic.

According to state statistics, last year only about 25 percent of
1,600 Jersey City students who took the state's High School Proficiency
Test passed all three elements--mathematics, reading, and writing.

That performance, however, marked an improvement over the 1986
school year, when only about 15 percent passed all three sections of
the test.

In the district's 28 elementary schools last year, 66 percent of
3rd-grade students passed the reading and mathematics sections of the
Metropolitan Achievement Test, a nationwide examination--up from the
previous year's record of 48.6 percent for reading and 53.6 percent for
mathematics.

Franklin L. Williams, the city's superintendent of schools, has
argued that the district is facing the same socioeconomic roadblocks
that stymie other urban school systems, and that increased funding
would quicken the pace of reform. The district currently has a budget
of more than $171 million.

Urban Roadblocks

Mr. Williams said in a statement last week that he took "strong
exception to the state's overall conclusions.'' But he added that he
would give the report "full and fair scrutiny.''

"A fundamental precept of education is that reform must be managed
from within,'' the superintendent said. "This has been, and will
continue to be, the policy of the professional educators who manage
this school district.''

Mr. Williams declined to say how the district planned to respond to
Mr. Cooperman's show-cause order.

A recent poll suggests that many within the school system itself are
supporting the state's efforts.

Of some 90 Jersey City principals and administrators surveyed, 65
percent fully supported the state takeover, despite the risk that they
might lose their jobs. Another 15 percent said they would support a
takeover "under certain circumstances,'' according to Henry Miller,
president of the New Jersey Association for School Principals and
Administrators, which conducted the poll.

The state's report, which compiles the work of two independent
consultants hired to conduct the investigation, devotes more than 70
pages to findings of corrupt management practices.

'Regard for the Children'

"Political patronage, union pressure, and cronyism is a consistent
motivation, at all levels, in the hiring, firing, promoting, and
deployment of staff,'' the report says.

Employment practices are "conducted without regard to the
significance such decisions will have upon the education of the
children,'' it continues.

The report also charges that on at least one occasion
contract-bidding laws were violated.

Richard A. Kaplan, director of the state's office of compliance,
said the report would be turned over to law-enforcement officials to
investigate the charges.

"As is true of other enterprises that reach such an advanced stage
of decay,'' the report concludes, "the Jersey City School District
offers a compelling case for bolder, more decisive and nontraditional
intervention by higher public authorities.''

Mayor Anthony R. Cucci, who is named in the report as among those
who have improperly intervened in district affairs, said last week that
he would need time to determine whether the report "could be
substantiated by fact'' before he would comment on the allegations.

But he added that he would not challenge the state's efforts at this
point.

"If the state can help us improve the quality of the education our
children receive, I will not stand in the way of state involvement,''
Mr. Cucci said in a statement.

'Aggressive Recruiting'

Mr. Cooperman said he had already begun "aggressively recruiting'' a
new superintendent in order to "put people on the alert'' that the
position would be filled immediately if the takeover went through.

Once a superintendent is found, he or she will work with state
officials to establish a new, 15-member board of education.

That board will serve in an advisory capacity for the first three
years of the takeover. In the fourth year, an election will be held to
choose nine board members, who will serve terms of up to three
years.

The state would remain in control for at least five years, or until
the district meets certification requirements.

If the district challenges the takeover attempt in its June 3
response, its arguments and the state's will first be heard by an
administrative-law judge within 20 days. Even if that judge finds in
favor of the district, Mr. Cooperman may override the decision and
begin takeover activities.

Under the intervention law, the education department has six months
in which to complete a managerial overhaul.

But if the city chooses to challenge the attempt directly in a state
court, the takeover could be delayed until late 1989.

In the meantime, district officials must also appear at a hearing
before Mr. Cooperman in Trenton on June 7. That hearing is to determine
whether the state should gain control of the school system's fiscal and
personnel operations.

Walter J. McCarroll, assistant commissioner for the division of
county and regional services, said that "on the basis of the evidence,
we feel it is necessary at this point to exercise some control.''

The district could appeal this step to both the state board of
education and state courts. But Mr. McCarroll said he was confident
that the motion would go unchallenged at the June 7 hearing, and that
the state would take partial control of the district by the end of the
month.

If that happens, Mr. McCarroll said, no staff changes will be made
immediately. But the current staff will be monitored, he said, because
after the takeover begins, "they may not be acting in the best interest
of the children.''

Vol. 07, Issue 36

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.

Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.